A May 16, 2005 article by Jaine Andrews on the site of South Dakota's Keloland-TV refers to ACSH in the course of putting Peter Jennings' lung cancer into prespective:
Harm Reduction
A prominently placed advertisement by the Lung Cancer Alliance in yesterday's New York Times conveys the important message that lung cancer, which kills more people than many other forms of cancer combined, is worthy of more attention and research than it currently receives. Unfortunately, however, the well-intentioned advertisement is also misleading and has disturbing implications.
A May 5, 2005 article by Ed Edelson describes a study suggesting that those who quit smoking may suffer some lung-impairing weight gain, but the article quotes ACSH's Dr. Gilbert Ross explaining that the problems caused by the weight gain are easily offset by the health gains from quitting:
Smokers who want to quit should not be deterred by this, said Dr. Gilbert L. Ross, medical director of the American Council on Science and Health in New York.
The Roanoke Times set off a unexpected scandal when it ran a photo of a Virginia woman who has (unwarranted) worries about the effect jackhammering on her street might have on her unborn baby -- but is, as seen in the photo (below), a smoker, a far more serious health threat. The photo has been the subject of debate on the TP-Talk listserv at Smokefree.net and at the Roanoke Times itself.
A tobacco company CEO appointed to the board of trustees of a reputable cancer institute? It's perhaps as outlandish as Time, Inc. being given an award for advancing tobacco control.
A March 4, 2005 article by Kirsten Boyd Goldberg on CancerLetter.com -- about the Legacy Foundation dubbing Time Inc. an anti-tobacco "hero" despite their magazines running many tobacco ads -- quotes an article on the topic by ACSH's Rivka Weiser:
Next week, the American Legacy Foundation (Legacy), the national tobacco control organization formed as a result of the tobacco Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) in 1998, will be giving Time, Inc. an award at its dinner for helping the American Legacy Foundation reach a national audience in support of the foundation s educational and awareness campaigns.(1) Corporations that advance tobacco control should be recognized and applauded for their work. However, as Time, Inc. accepts millions of dollars from the tobacco industry in order to promote cigarettes (sometimes in particularly questionable ways) in some of the country s most popular magazines, Time, Inc. s status as a respectable model of tobacco control work is dubious.
Yesterday, the Smokefree Movies Action Network launched a campaign to obtain signatures on a global petition to encourage the Motion Picture Association of America to keep smoking out of youth-rated movies. Given that every day, more than 5,000 Americans under the age of 18 will smoke their first cigarette, the factors influencing youth smoking are crucial to address.
I saw the posters everywhere this weekend "Celebrating Fifty Years of Flavor": Celebrating Marlboro Cigarettes!
Celebrating? Under what possible circumstance should we be celebrating the anniversary of the introduction of a product that is the leading cause of preventable death in America? It is bad enough that we tolerate it--and turn our heads away from the billions of dollars spent annually to advertise and promote it.
But we have to celebrate it, too?
A February 23, 2005 article by Nancy Wang in the Stanford Daily described student attitudes toward smoking, noting some of the risks and citing ACSH:
In 1997, the American Council on Science and Health cited medical evidence for a variety of other harms triggered by smoking. These include psoriasis (a skin disease marked by red scaly patches), osteoporosis, earlier loss of hearing, dysfunctional sperm, strokes, cataracts, and abnormal eye movement.
A February 14, 2005 Journal News article by David Schepp, about the company Weyco firing workers who smoke, included comments from ACSH president Dr. Elizabeth Whelan:
"If I had a choice I would not hire a smoker," says Elizabeth Whelan, president of the American Council on Science and Health, a public-health advocacy organization...
As a practical matter, Whelan says, it makes less sense in the face of rising health-care costs to hire someone who voluntarily participates in a habit known to further disease.
"It's the world's first significant health treaty. It's a moment we hope will change global health."
Denis Aitken, World Health Organization1
It would seem that if dozens of countries agreed to an international treaty on just about any topic the consensus and its ramifications would be viewed as groundbreaking and therefore be well-covered in the media. This would seem to be especially true if the treaty related to an extremely crucial public health issue, one which causes the premature death of an estimated 5 million people worldwide annually. One might expect that the story would be major front-page news.